Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Regressions and enhancements surrounding the new automatic field editor dialogue #8971

Closed
8 tasks done
ThiloteE opened this issue Jul 12, 2022 · 1 comment · Fixed by #8973
Closed
8 tasks done

Regressions and enhancements surrounding the new automatic field editor dialogue #8971

ThiloteE opened this issue Jul 12, 2022 · 1 comment · Fixed by #8973
Assignees
Labels
automatic-field-editor bug Confirmed bugs or reports that are very likely to be bugs type: enhancement

Comments

@ThiloteE
Copy link
Member

ThiloteE commented Jul 12, 2022

JabRef version

Latest development branch build (please note build date below)

Operating system

GNU / Linux

Details on version and operating system

JabRef 100.0.0 Linux 5.4.0-122-generic amd64 Java 18.0.1 JavaFX 18.0.1+2

Checked with the latest development build

  • I made a backup of my libraries before testing the latest development version.
  • I have tested the latest development version and the problem persists

Steps to reproduce the behaviour

Follow up issue to 9701e35

Some of my remarks may be nitpicks (less important), others are regressions from old "Manage field names and content".

The Automatic field editor can be opened by selecting an entry in the library and then go to Edit > Automatic Field Editor

Issues:

  • 1. Regression: The Field selection does not allow to write custom fields anymore. In the old version this was possible.
    Before:
    grafik
    After:
    grafik

  • 2. I am not sure what Clear field is supposed to do.

    Example:

    @Article{testclearfield,
       whatever = {a}
       }
    

    Press clear field.
    Result: Nothing happens.

Non-critical/low priority issues that are based on personal subjective opinion

  • 3. Rename Clear field to Delete field & content or Clear field content, depending on how it behaves. See above. I don't really understand yet. Needs more testing/explanation.

  • 4. The tab name two fields is very ambiguous. It could be replaced with Copy, move & swap or Copy, move & swap content

  • 5. Replace all words in the automatic field editor dialogue that contain value with content instead.

    Why? I argue the word content can be understood more easily than value. The word "value" can be attached to many things e.g. also to field names. The word "content" on the other hand means a value is within something and therefore in this specific context would be more specific.

  • 6. Rename:
    grafik
    Also change the colour slightly to grey. Right now it almost looks like a button that could be pressed instead of being a field that can be written into.

Appendix

No response

@ThiloteE ThiloteE added type: enhancement bug Confirmed bugs or reports that are very likely to be bugs labels Jul 12, 2022
@HoussemNasri
Copy link
Member

@ThiloteE Thank you for looking into it! I agree with you on most of the points.

  1. Regression: The Field selection does not allow to write custom fields anymore. In the old version this was possible.

Absolutely, maybe another tab called "Add Field" that adds a field to all selected entries. It's also possible to include this feature in the "Edit field value" tab, but I prefer to make the UI as simple as possible.

. I am not sure what Clear field is supposed to do.

Example:

@Article{testclearfield,
whatever = {a}
}
Press clear field.
Result: Nothing happens.

This is strange😕. Clearing a field is supposed to set its value to empty. Additionally, the field will be removed from the BibteX file because JabRef doesn't store empty fields. Did you choose "Keep Modifications" when quitting the dialog?

  1. The tab name two fields is very ambiguous. It could be replaced with Copy, move & swap or Copy, move & swap content

I considered that option but did not select it. The reasoning behind this is that other actions may be added in the future in addition to Copy, Move, and Swap, but there will always be two fields :). I'm not very good at naming things, so I'll have to look up other applications and see what name they used.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
automatic-field-editor bug Confirmed bugs or reports that are very likely to be bugs type: enhancement
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants